Funding This work was supported by the Guangdong Province Universities and Colleges Pearl River Scholar Funded Scheme (2019), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (82103931 and 82003443), the Guangzhou Science and Technology Project (202002030255), and Young Elite Scientists Sponsorship Program by CAST (2019QNRC001)
The Assembly members who voted for AB 996 had received a total of $964,740 (average $22,970 per yes vote) in tobacco industry campaign contributions during the years 1975-1993, compared with only $193,567 for opponents (average $5,693 per no vote).15 Newspapers reported that campaign contributions from tobacco interests to legislators were buying votes against AB 13 and for AB 996.59 58 59 Friedman denounced passage of AB 996 as an example of the absolutely disgusting power the tobacco industry wields in the Legislature.60 In the debates over local tobacco control ordinances, it had become routine for the tobacco industry, acting through surrogates, to claim that smoking restrictions would cause economic problems
Research shows that they might smoke to improve their immediate sense of well-being or as a quick reward 28
Reusable options are better for the environment and less likely to split open mid-security check
